What can prevent Gmail recipient mapping from forwarding email to the new address?

I am the Gsuite administrator for my company. For a departing user, it was planned that the company's Gmail would be blocked for 12 months before the termination was completed. I blocked the account but was then instructed to give the user more time to complete the current business relationship.

I restored the company's Gmail account, reset the user's password, and emailed the user to confirm the temporary password.

If the user clicked the link in the confirmation email, the user receives an error message instead of being directed to a login screen to change their password to something only they know: contact your Administrator.

This user is not a system administrator.

To work around this problem, I set up recipient mapping with my administrator's Gmail address as an alternate Gmail account to receive email sent to this user. However, when I immediately sent a test email to Gmail, it never arrived in my administrator account.

Why can't this user's password be reset? And what prevents recipient mapping from forwarding email from the user's Gmail account to my Gmail administrator account?

i18n l10n – Message (from the message stack) not translated into the preferred language of the recipient

Here is a code that can be inserted into devel / php (run php code) when the message template new_user_register exists with a user reference field called field_user_reference

This message should be sent when a new user registers (but this has nothing to do with my problem because the code can be run outside … I only give this information to provide context).

$id=127;
$account=DrupaluserEntityUser::load($id);
$message=DrupalmessageEntityMessage::create((
    'template' => 'new_user_register',
    'uid' => $id
));
$message->set('field_user_reference', $account);
$message->save();

$subscribers = Drupal::service('message_subscribe.subscribers');
$notify_options = ();
$subscribe_options = (
    'notify message owner' => TRUE,
    'notify blocked users'=>TRUE, //new user is blocked
    'entity access'=>FALSE, //new user don't have access (blocked)
    'uids' => (new Drupalmessage_subscribeSubscribersDeliveryCandidate(('subscribe_user'), ('email'), $id)),
);

$subscribers->sendMessage($account, $message,$notify_options,$subscribe_options);

Even if the template is translated, user 127 receives the message in the site's default language, rather than in the preferred language.

Is it a mistake or am I missing something?

exodus – BTC wallet from "Airgap.it" asks for recipient address prefix "1ABC". What format is it?

I try to set up a cold and a hot wallet.

  1. Hot Wallet = "Exodus" on my daily cell phone. The address format is Bech32 with the prefix "bc1" or the legacy prefix from the format "P2PKH". The addresses then start with "1".

  2. Cold Wallet = "Airgap Vault" on an offline device plus "Airgap Wallet" on an everyday mobile phone. Both from "airgap.it".

  3. I tried to send a test amount from the cold wallet to the hot wallet, but the "Airgap Wallet" cold wallet only accepts BTC addresses that begin with the prefix "1ABC". How do I get this address from my "hot" Exodus wallet and what is the name of the address standard / format?

I could only find BTC Cash related entries on Google, but BTC Cash addresses start with "q" or "bitcoincash: q". The wallet software would also have to be very misleading, since BTC-Cash should not even be supported. I can't imagine that, so I'm really stupid right now. Any help is much appreciated, thanks!

Wallet – Bitcoin sent, recipient claims not to have received

The address received 0.07014343 BTC in 3d727e3f4565e011c0348f813c2d5480210b6bae2003a0f7abaa949d1a7c599a. These coins have already been issued so that at least the recipient's wallet provider is informed of the transaction. Depending on the type of wallet, the recipient's account may not have been credited due to internal system problems.

Alternatively, the recipient has received the money and is trying to defraud you for an additional payment.

In both cases, your first transaction is successful and the recipient has to work with their wallet provider. You shouldn't send them any more money.


Verify that a transaction is complete

Based on the attention that this question receives, I will go through some of the best practices in verifying the finality / completion / status of a transaction.

In order for a Bitcoin transaction to be complete and irreversible, it must be summarized in one block.

To check whether a transaction has been closed, you can check a block explorer. Block Explorer are websites that read information from the blockchain and make it accessible to people who do not run their own nodes. Some commonly used Bitcoin discoverers are blockchain.com, blockchair.com, blockstream.info and btc.com (not affiliated with them).

If you look up the transaction, e.g. For example, using the link above, either a transaction details page or a form of an error not found is displayed.

If a transaction is not found, it is almost certain that it has not been cleared. In this case, you should aim for it Repetition the transaction instead of sending a new one. It is possible that the transaction has actually been sent and has not yet been picked up by Explorer. Submitting a second transaction can therefore result in a double payment.

If a transaction is found, it may be listed as unconfirmed. In this case, just wait until it is confirmed. If a transaction has already been confirmed, you should see an indication of the block into which it was mined (either in the form of a block number or a block hash that begins with a series of zeros). When a transaction is confirmed, it is complete and irreversible.

The recipient says that he did not receive the coins

There are a handful of scenarios in which the recipient may not see the coins even after the transaction is complete:

  1. The recipient's wallet is out of sync / is not updated correctly. This is a more common scenario if you're using Exchange or other hosted wallets, or using a normal wallet with a spotty or weak internet connection. In this case, the recipient must check with their wallet provider to find and credit the coins.
  2. The address is wrong – either you made a mistake when copying the address, or the recipient provided an incorrect address. In this case, you should work with the recipient to find out who needs to absorb the loss since the coins are most likely not recoverable.
  3. The recipient tries to cheat you. Once a transaction is complete, only the recipient can access the coins, find them, or otherwise try to work with them. If they insist that they have not received them, there is no problem on your part and you may be cheated.

Things to consider

  1. Do not use an Explorer recommended by the recipient. It's trivial to create an explorer that hides certain transactions and makes you think that when they're completed, they're not complete. Always use multiple third party explorers if you have to. Ideally, you should run your own instance of Bitcoin Core -txindex activated and check the transaction yourself, but for many users this is not possible in the short term.
  2. If you really need to resend the coins, first make a transaction in your own wallet that will send the entire balance to yourself and wait for this to be confirmed. This prevents you from accidentally paying twice if the original transaction simply wasn't sent properly.
  3. Be patient – it can take a few days for low fee transactions to be confirmed in times of high network activity. If you see an unconfirmed transaction, just wait.

Google Groups – Reply to an external recipient

I have a little problem with Google Groups – this is sending an email to an external recipient.

The situation is as follows:

  1. An outside party (let's call it EXT) sends an email to the Google Group email address you provided.
  2. Since the Google group is set to publish = Internet permission, an email from EXT will be converted to a new topic, which will appear in the Google Groups forum.
  3. If you reply to the EXT topic as a Google group member, an email will be sent to all other group members. That is correct.
  4. However, EXT does not receive an email with a reply and does not receive a message.

I wonder if it will be possible to get answers from EXT.
Am I missing something obvious? Or is there a permit that needs to be set?

Thanks for your help,

Linux Postfix – checking multiple recipient sources

I successfully set up Postfix on Ubuntu 18.04 with relay_recipient_maps using two different methods, but I seem to be able to use only one method in the configuration file.

The first method is to use LDAP queries to our AD servers for every email to check if the address is there.
LDAP method:
relay_recipient_maps = ldap: /etc/postfix/ldap_relay_recipients.cf

I also have a script to generate a file with valid email addresses every X minutes.
File:
relay_recipient_maps = hash: / etc / postfix / relay_recipients

I want to use LDAP as the primary method and only use the file as a secondary check if LDAP cannot find the address.

Is that possible?

Thank you in advance.

Gmail – Search for Notes-labeled messages (from me / without recipient)

My Notes label was removed and all the notes I had in Gmail (synced with the Notes app on iPhone and Mac) disappeared. They are still there and are almost impossible to find.

When I look at the message signature, I only see that it comes from me and has no recipient. I would like to filter for these, but can't find a way to search for an empty field.

I tried from:me to:() and things like that, but no luck

Transactions – I sent Bitcoin to an address but the recipient hasn't received it yet. It's been 2 days

The blockchain is the only truth

At the time I wrote this, this transaction had 204 confirmations. That said, it was definitely received.

If the address is correct and the recipient says that he has not "received" it, then he is wrong. Either their wallet is out of sync or they are wrong (or lying to you)

Note that Bitcoin does not send money from wallet to wallet. It is not a process that takes some time between sending and receiving. At no time is money really out of one wallet and "on the way" to another wallet.

The only thing that is transferred is a new block to be transferred to each Knots (wallets, etc.) in the Bitcoin world about every ten minutes. As long as you have the latest block, you know exactly which address the money has.


The following is to clarify my point of view that the process does not take time. You should skip it unless you are interested in this detail or find it controversial.

Transaction duration

Let's take a closer look at what happens when you make a typical Bitcoin payment. Keep in mind that Bitcoin is quite complex, so I'll simplify it. There are exotic payment methods that I will not cover (RBF, n of m, …). My knowledge is limited, but I think I can shed some more light on this.

When you make a payment in your wallet, your wallet creates a kind of transaction proposal. This suggestion will be sent to some nearby nodes on the Bitcoin network.

After submitting this offer, your wallet will mark the amount entered as reserved for this transaction and will not let you try again to spend it. However, your wallet will know that this amount is still under your control and still as much "in your wallet" as ever and not yet in someone else's wallet.

After a short time your planned transaction has been forwarded from node to node, will be checked on everyone and will reach some miners. Finally, a miner will integrate your planned transaction into a block and successfully dismantle that block.

Before that time, the miner considers the money yours. After this time, the miner considers the money as that of the recipient. There is no time when the miner sees the money as on the go.

The miner transfers the new block to nearby nodes. When each node finishes checking the new block, it is the moment when a particular node stops believing that the money is yours and starts believing that the money belongs to the recipient.

The new block is passed from node to node until it reaches your wallet. Once the verification is complete that the block is blocking your wallet, it no longer believes the money is yours and begins to believe (provisionally †) that the money now belongs to the recipient.

There is no time in between. No time in which your wallet believes that the money is not in any of the wallets that have been exchanged between wallets but not yet received. None of this is really possible.

There is time for the proposed transaction to circulate, but during this time all nodes consider the money as your money. All nodes accept other suggestions from you for another transaction with this money. This is because until one of these suggestions is contained in a mined block, the money is still yours and still is not being spent.

It takes time to pass on a transaction proposal. Mining takes time. The Bitcoin network is large, so there are times when some nodes have the latest block and others don't. We say the network has not reached consensus – although every node has no doubt whether the money is yours or the recipient's.

The change of ownership of the money takes place immediately (at each node separately) and the money is never really "between the wallets".


† Blockchain fork

Because there are many independent miners (and mining pools), two or more blocks may be mined at approximately the same time to be accepted as the generally accepted next block. This means that a recently accepted block is sometimes discarded in favor of another block on which a larger number of subsequent blocks have been mined "above" the block. For this reason, nodes usually wait for at least five blocks above the block to be fetched with your transaction (a total of six blocks) before accepting the change of ownership of the money as fully confirmed.

So there is a period of time between the first block and the sixth block when a node may consider the change in ownership of the money to be insufficiently confirmed. This does not mean that a knot is not sure who has the money. That doesn't mean the money is on the way. This does not mean that the Bitcoin network can conduct a second transaction to take money out of the recipient's wallet. This just means that the Bitcoin network may collectively decide that your proposed transaction has not been torn down at all. In most cases where this happens, the forgotten scheduled transaction is automatically added to a subsequent block and everything is fine and everyone forgets that hiccups ever occurred.

This does not happen with every transaction. It is rare. It is not really money that is "on the go" or "neither in your wallet nor" not received ".


Terminology and philosophical aspects

Proposed transactions

I talk about it above proposed Transactions and proposals, These words are generally not used in the Bitcoin community. Most of the talk is about transactions, unconfirmed transactions and confirmed transactions. I wanted to use another word to clearly identify a transaction that is in circulation and has not yet been cleared.

What's in your wallet

The reason I put "in your wallet" in fear quotes when I first mentioned it is because Bitcoin wallets don't really contain money. They contain a secret number called a private key, which you can use to prove that you control some money (have some money). Anyone who knows this PIN can remotely "take money out of their wallet" without having access to your wallet! Money is not stored in Bitcoin purses, but we do because it is a useful shortcut that makes it easier to talk about Bitcoin. This is a useful way to explain Bitcoin to beginners, although it is misleading and insecure,

That's funny!

Other people will believe that my description of how Bitcoin works puts too much emphasis on the underlying dry-technical (scary?) Nature of transactions and that it's better to describe the process as if paper notes were pulled out of your leather wallet and an intermediate organization would be pulled through and then placed in someone else's leather wallet. I agree that this view is useful, but I am concerned that it gives the impression that banknotes are not in the sender's wallet and not in the recipient's wallet, but in the hands of an intermediary who is asked to can return or intervene change the outcome. Consider a literal reading of the original title of the question at the top of this page.

Address – How can a recipient check whether the transaction data has been changed by third parties?

My scenario:

My webserver:
– Generates private and public addresses as well as a wallet address from the public key for a user website account
– Server cannot connect to the outside (connection to the Bitcoin network not possible)
– Has a page where anyone can send money to the wallet address of the user account

What I have to do:
– The server must know when bitcoins were sent to the wallet address and how many bitcoins are in total at the wallet address

Since the web server cannot access the Internet, I use Javascript on the browser page to get the information on the wallet address by https://api.blockcypher.com/v1/btc/test3/addrs/miedePxMt4SDQHjWJyfhbCWvXcm33vzDa1/full and / or https get: //api.blockcypher.com/v1/btc/test3/txs/681b16b4de3676a5865a85e0bba3097afcc195d928f3167e4d5591c388c1e474? includeHex = true … and send this data to my web server using an Ajax call to check the received bitcoins.

Note: I sent Testnet bitcoins to this wallet.

Everything works, except 1 problem: the browser user can easily change the Bitcoin amounts and make the web server believe that more Bitcoin has been sent.

My question is: Which methods can I use to check on the web server whether the transaction data has not been changed by the browser user? The web server has the pub / priv key of the receiving wallet. The "bx" libbitcoin-explorer program is available on the web server, and I could possibly install other software.

Can I use the cammands in this diagram at all? https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-explorer/wiki/Transaction-Commands